Monday, November 29, 2010

I know, I know -- what union isn't a big lib union? But as big lib unions go the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) is one of the biggest and lib-est. And Andy Stern, recent ex-president of the SEIU is a big Obama buddy. You'll recall that a year or so ago, the "most transparent administration" (at least in the last 22 months or so) released a visitor list that showed Stern most prolific visitor to the White House during the Administration of the Fallen Messiah. He also was a major strategist behind the ramrodding of vastly unpopular ObamaCare through the congress in the dark of the night. So one might consider it odd that a big Obama backer and ObamaCare pusher's union would be kicking member's kids out of their health care plan.

Why are they kicking kids out of their health care plan?:

The union blamed financial problems it said were caused by the state’s health department and new national health-insurance requirements.

In other words we're a bunch of hypocrites, we're admitting that ObamaCare is an utter failure even before it begins and it's going to cost us an arm and a leg.So screw the kids, let someone else (the taxpayer) pay for them.

Saturday, November 27, 2010

It's no coincidence that when you do a news search for ACORN these days, the top hits are mostly about tasty ways to prepare acorn squash. The last thing in the world the lapdog liberal media would want to do is to shine the spotlight on the evil doings of a crooked activist group with ties to their Messiah. Fortunately, there is Fox News to tell the story for us:

The scandal-plagued ACORN may no longer exist, but its tarnished legacy lives on in court, as the activist group and its former employees face criminal punishment.

So far this year, at least 18 former workers have admitted guilt or been convicted on varying charges of election fraud. The punishment has ranged from probation to several months of prison time.

ACORN, once a powerful advocate for low-income and minority voters, shuttered its operations amid plummeting revenues in March, six months after conservative activists posing as a pimp and prostitute caught on video some of the group's employees offering them tax advice.

But the group is still facing charges in Nevada on conspiracy to commit the crime of compensation for registration of voters.The trial, originally scheduled to begin Monday, has been postponed likely until next year.

Former workers across the country already are being punished for their criminal activities

Two things to wonder about in the wake of one of the biggest conservative election blow-outs in modern political history:

1. Would the lapdog liberal media be as silent about election fraud were there a scintilla of evidence that any was committed by conservative groups? Hell no! We'd be talking about it from 30 seconds after the election returns began coming in on November 2 until after the 2012 election when if God is smiling on us, Barack Obama will have his ass handed to him on a sliver platter. The fact that proves that there is no conservative voter fraud is that the liberal media isn't talking about voter fraud.

2. How many of the razor-thin wins for liberals would have been wins for conservatives had the liberals not engaged in massive voter fraud as they always do during every election cycle? I submit to you that Sharon Angle, Dino Rossi, Joe Miller and others would be senators-elect right now because liberals HAVE to cheat to win -- they can't win any other way.

The proof is in their actions:

1. The Obama injustice department refuses to prosecute clear voter intimidation caught on tape because it was committed by Black Panthers.

2. Liberals consistently oppose voter ID laws on the basis that voters will somehow be "disenfranchised". Who among us would be opposed to showing an ID at the polls?

3. Nearly all of the attempts to make it more "convenient" (like going to the polls on the appointed day to elect your leaders in the best country on the face of the earth is inconvenient) to vote are supported by liberals because they dramatically increase the opportunity for voter fraud. Many of these early voter initiatives are now so accepted that the associated fraud has been institutionalized into the process.

Consider Iowa's early voter process which allows people to go to the "polls" at libraries around the state and cast their ballots up to one month early. Somehow each and every one of those ballots has to be guarded all day and then make it to one centralized collection point on a daily basis.Most states now have similar processes. No opportunity for fraud there -- no, not at all. Isn't it funny how, when caught in close races, liberals always seem to "find" misplaced ballots that benefit them and result in scum like Al Franken pulling out close wins? Liberal wins brought to you by election fraud made possible by these types of initiatives.

Ever wonder why liberals are interested in bringing 12 million illegals "out of the shadows"? So they can escort them right "out of the shadows" and into the voting booth. I've witnessed the phenomenon of liberal groups trying to pressure people into allowing non-eligible voters to get to the polls to vote myself. If it happens out here in flyover country, imagine how bad it must be in states literally teeming with ineligible immigrants and outright illegal immigrants?While liberals are always interested in getting voting rights for legal and illegal aliens and felons, they never seem to be interested in making sure our fighting men and women overseas aren't "disenfranchised". The proof is in the fact that they have to vehemently deny that they want to purposely "disenfranchise" military voters while at the same time disenfranchising military voters. BTW, did we ever solve the issue of whether The Messiah's home state was going to be able to getting military voters their ballots in time? Probably not since service members vote overwhelmingly conservative.

Bottom line here is that these 18 ACORN crooks are just the tip of the iceberg. Liberal Democrat voter fraud is all around us but you wouldn't know it because the lapdog liberal media is more interested in telling you how to cook the perfect acorn squash than it is uncovering rampant voter fraud on the side of the team they are rooting for.

Wednesday, November 24, 2010

Don't you feel so much safer with a peacenick as president? Is the world a safer place with a U.S. president who genuflects to every tin-pan dictator? The answer to these questions are no and no which is exactly why North Korea is on the brink of re-firing the Korean war and we are left helplessly issuing "strong condemnations" and begging China to talk Kim Jong Il's punk kid and his rogue government into into backing down.

Not to belabor this point but elections have consequences and one of the direct consequences of the last presidential election -- as any common-sense conservative could have told you at the time -- is that we have become the laughing stock of the world.

In the last two years we have been treated to absurd images of a president of the United States of America bowing to Saudi kings, sitting politely through Daniel Ortega's rant against the Great Satan, offering an outstretched hand to the mental patient who heads the government of Iran, sputtering and stammering in protest as North Korea becomes increasingly belligerent and kills 50 South Korean sailors. And now, the pinnacle of our weakness -- the SECOND attack on South Korea by the tyrant to its north.

And truthfully, this isn't even the pinnacle of our weakness because North Korea is merely testing the waters at this point. Daddy got away with whatever he wanted to. Now the little boy is seeing how far he can push it. The answer, of course, will be as far as he damn well pleases. And he ain't done pushing. Now we're in the uncomfortable position of begging a what used to be a backwards third-world nation a mere 25 years ago to appeal its friends Kim Jong Il and his little boy to pretty-please stop bombing and killing people in the free, prosperous, democratic republic of South Korea. And it's kind of a fine line when that formerly backwards third world nation (which is quickly becoming an economic and military superpower) is propping up your profligate spending by buying hundreds of billions of dollars of your debt.

To any one who wants to persist in the bogus argument that we're safer with a "can't we all just get along" foreign policy, you're an utter fool -- just like the court jester on the world stage we unfortunately have to refer to as the president of the United States. At least for another 787 days and 18 hours.
Read more!

The Federal Communications Commission said Tuesday that it has postponed its December meeting by about one week to Dec. 21, sparking a flurry of speculation that the agency did so to prepare for a vote on net neutrality.

“An extra week will help us evaluate potential agenda items for December,” said Jen Howard, a spokeswoman for the FCC.

FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski is expected to introduce a proposal that would be under its questionable legal jurisdiction over broadband service providers, according to Stifel Nicholaus analyst Rebecca Arbogast. And the chairman is in the difficult position of now having to convince two Democratic commissioners who have pushed him to reassert authority over broadband services so he can implement rules against discrimination of content on Internet networks.

Analysts said the delay was probably created so Genachowski could garner support for a majority 3 to 2 vote on a final rule.

"We suspect the Democrats could ultimately support a Title I order, but they may seek some sort of concessions on this or other matters," Arbogast wrote in a research note Tuesday.

Let's not fool ourselves about what is going on here: We're not talking about fairness and "neutrality" any more than the "employee free choice" act is about employee free choice or "Social Security" is social security or the "Fairness Doctrine" is about fairness. Any time you have a liberal concept with a seemingly innocuous name (or a friendly-sounding name for that matter)it is always, without exception, cover for an evil concept. In this case, the evil concept is limiting conservative speech in the name of "fairness". Meanwhile, you're not going to hear anything about "neutralizing" the speech of George Soros-funded liberal hate groups because they practice the type of speech leftists like Obama approve of.

The simple fact of the matter is this: Liberals hate the fact that they can't succeed in the free market of ideas on talk radio and cable. The only reason why they succeed on the Internet is because leftist fat cats like Soros and others fund them. Liberals are perfectly okay with free speech as long as the opinions match their leftist ideology. But in a country where more than twice as many citizens self-identify as conservative as they do liberal, the liberal elite HATE free conservative speech. With the window closing on any legislative opportunities to limit conservative free speech, Obama's leftist FCC thinks they can just decree limits on conservative speech in the name of "neutrality". Hello China, hello Venezuela. Google, are you ready to talk to lefty Genachowski about parameters for limiting web searching in the Union of United Socialist States of America? Wouldn't want people to be able to have free access to information on "freedom" and "liberty". Gotta keep those nuts who "cling to their guns and religion" in line.
Read more!